Education and Paideia in many other languages are expressed with the same word, as for example with the word: Education in English, éducation in French, educazione in Italian, Bildung in German, educación in Spanish, educação in Portuguese.

In Greece, fortunately, we still distinguish Education from Paideia. We say Ministry / Minister of Pedia and higher / medium / elementary Education.

But what is the difference between Paideia and Education? The use of the two terms is it random or expresses, or even expressed in the past a significant difference? In what follows an answer to this question is attempted.

In the Dictionary of Modern Greek Language by G. Babiniotis: Education is defined as the systematic process of transmitting knowledge and skills on a specific object. (Technical, vocational, education …), and Paideia is defined as the process providing systematic knowledge, for the upbringing of someone’s intellectual level.

The above definitions describe the difference between the two terms. A clearer and more understandable definition of the two words was given by the late Cornelius Castoriadis in his book “The ability of an autonomous Society»[i]. Here is a small excerpt, related to this topic:

“Education is not the teaching: The issue is not to teach them arithmetic. The arithmetic is necessary to live, but education is what the Greeks called Paideia; that is, education and, mainly, skilling for the transformation of the young child into a real man with the full meaning of the word; namely into a man free, responsible and able to make decisions . It is obvious that education aimed at freedom (what the Greeks call Paideia, Παιδεία), cannot be done but only through the exercise of freedom. In other words, educating citizens in a democracy should produce all the conditions for its exercise. ”

There may be other definitions for the education and the Paideia, which we do not know, because our education and experiences are not relevant to the topic. However, based on the experience of an ordinary citizen, we concluded that:

(1) Education means the process of acquiring knowledge and skills on a particular subject,

(2) Paideia means to transform young people into free, responsible and able to make decisions for the good of all citizens; for people with genuine democratic culture.

Besides that, this class of education, which the Greeks call Paideia, is acquired through the exercise of freedom and of real democracy and not through teaching, as most believe. The teaching of freedom and democracy without ensuring their effective exercise is not Pedia; it is verbosity and sometimes training in absurdity, in immorality and in selfishness.

Today Paideia in Greece, in the sense defined above, does not exist. The current “paideia” in Greece, intends to transform the young people into followers rather than to ‘people free, responsible, and able to make decisions’, ie to citizens. Education today became a vehicle to create party followers, which decides for them without their consent.

The cause of this distortion lies in the perception and practice that Paideia is provided by “progressive” teachings and not through the exercise of youth for freedom and true democracy. But still worse is the perception that the training of the young people for this transformation must be done in the way that each political party understands the freedom and the democracy. But freedom and democracy are unique and not as many as the political parties.

Today we do not have Paideia. Unfortunately we have training for the transformation of the young people in blue, pink, black, siklamen, green or red fans.[ii]

It is a fact that in other countries, the top choice of the Education is related to the provision of materials and services to improve the lives of people and not education/paideia as defined above. The education/paideia in the countries of “Western Civilization” is not a primary but a second option, which primarily is provided mainly through the teaching and secondarily through the exercise. This strategy results to the deterioration of culture and to the degradation and education. Many thinkers and experts consider that the deterioration of culture made the current education blind; an education without basic vision and goal.

This view was expressed by the famous philosopher and poet T. S. Eliot (1888 – 1965), who in his essay “The current Education and the Classics,” writes: “An educational system is meaningful only within a given social system. If education today is lacking, if it seems that is chaotic and meaningless, it is because we have not stabilized and satisfactory constitution of society.”

Similar views especially for those who are responsible to provide education to ordinary citizens, expresses the father of Quantum Mechanics Erwin Schrödinger (1887 – 1961), who in his book Science and Humanism[iii] writes: “The majority of educated people is not interested in science and does not realize that the scientific knowledge is a part of the background to the ideals of human life. Many – in their complete ignorance of what science really is – believe that science’ main goal is to invent or to contribute to the invention of new machines to improve their living conditions. These people are willing to delegate this task to the experts, just like supplying hydraulic hoses to be repaired. If the future of our children is decided by people of this mindset, the result will necessarily be what I have described previously.

Greece, where Paideia was once born, has not simply adopted the above strategy of the West, but outperformed the distortion and degradation of Paideia, developing a modern “pedia” model that the only relation with the ancient Greek one is the name.

Everyday we see the results of this “modern Greek paideia” with the vandalism of school buildings, the destruction of educational equipment, we see it in the “culture” of the people to whom the ‘paideia’ provides asylum, as well as to the controversial teaching material and the questionable authority of teachers.

Worst of all, however, is the current public opinion that this is the right way to educate young people in Freedom and Democracy!

The conclusion of an ordinary citizen who does not have the education and experience of a political person, of a trade unionist and of an expert, is that in Greece we do not have Pedia; we have education that is crippled by the lack of Pedia.

Sources

[i] Κορνήλιος Καστοριάδης, Η ΔΥΝΑΤΟΤΗΤΑ ΜΙΑΣ ΑΥΤΟΝΟΜΗΣ ΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΑΣ, Εκδόσεις: Στάσει Εκπίπτοντες.

[ii] The colors / symbols of political parties in Greece.

[iii] Erwin Schrödinger, ΚΟΝΤΑ ΣΤΟΝ ΑΝΘΡΩΠΟ. Εκδόσεις: Π Τραυλός – Ε Κωσταράκη 1992

Since globalization contains far-reaching implications for practically every facet of life, it is necessarily suggests the need to rethink key questions of intercultural communication, multiculturalism, cross-cultural education. The definitions of all these expressions is dynamic, evolving, and reflects the continual changes in our society. In broad terms, it is the ability to make and communicate meaning from one culture to another by the use of a variety of socially contextual symbols. All these thoughts have been questioned not only by philosophy, sociology, and history but also by the process of globalization. These are the concepts of Cosmopolitan view of world societies and cultures.

The word ‘cosmopolitan’, which derives from the Greek word kosmopolitês (‘citizen of the world’), is defined as: familiar with and at ease in many different countries and cultures: his knowledge of French, Italian, and Spanish made him genuinely cosmopolitan, including people from many different countries: immigration transformed the city into a cosmopolitan metropolis, having an exciting and glamorous character associated with travel and a mixture of cultures.

What does the notion of ‘cosmopolitization’ then have to say? And why is it so important to clearly distinguish it from the many ‘cosmopolitanisms’ (Kant, Hegel, Habermas, Nussbaum, Appiah, Benhabib, Held etc.) of European philosophy and extra-European histories of thought? Cosmopolitanism as a theoretical approach, provides fine descriptions of what it means to be and communicate as a global citizen, how to critically study interconnectedness within and across cultures, and how to embrace differences without glossing over them.

Cosmopolitanism can be understood as a socio-cultural condition, which is expressed in the conception of an open and cosmopolitan world. This condition is created from the base of processes linked to globalization, such as greater access to information and the development of communications and telecommunications. These processes facilitate a multiplication of social exchanges – including migrations – as well as cultural contacts which bring us closer to places and cultures which are physically and, sometimes, psychologically distant.

Cosmopolitanism has been used to describe a wide variety of important views in moral and socio-political thought. All cosmopolitan beliefs share the idea that all human beings, regardless of their political affiliation, do (or at least can) belong to a single community, and that this community should be cultivated. Different versions of cosmopolitanism envision this community in different ways, some focusing on political institutions, others on moral norms or relationships, and still others focusing on shared markets or forms of cultural and educational expression. Our interest in cosmopolitanism lies in its challenge to commonly recognized attachments to fellow-citizens, the local state, parochially shared cultures, education and the like.

Within various levels of developmental ability, a cosmopolitan person can derive and convey meaning, and use their knowledge to achieve a desired purpose or goal that requires the use of language skills, be they spoken, written or electronically transformed. A literate person can mediate their world by consciously and flexibly coordinating meaning from one linguistic knowledge base and apply or connect it to another knowledge base.

Some critics contend that the multicultural argument for the preservation of cultures is premised on a problematic view of culture and of the individual’s relationship to culture. Cultures are not distinct, self-contained wholes; they have long interacted and influenced one another through war, imperialism, trade, and migration. People in many parts of the world live within cultures that are already cosmopolitan, characterized by cultural hybridist. As Jeremy Waldron (1995, 100) argues, “We live in a world formed by technology and trade; by economic, religious, and political imperialism and their offspring; by mass migration and the dispersion of cultural influences. In this context, to immerse oneself in the traditional practices of, say, an aboriginal culture might be a fascinating anthropological experiment, but it involves an artificial dislocation from what actually is going on in the world.” To aim at preserving or protecting a culture runs the risk of privileging one supposedly pure version of that culture, thereby crippling its ability to adapt to changes in circumstances (Waldron, 110; see also Benhabib 2002 and Scheffler 2007). Waldron also rejects the premise that the options available to an individual must come from a particular culture; meaningful options may come from a variety of cultural sources. What people need are cultural materials, not access to a particular cultural structure.

In response, multicultural theorists agree that cultures are overlapping and interactive, but still maintain that individuals belong to distinct societal cultures and wish to preserve these cultures (Kymlicka 1995, 103). Multiculturalism is a body of thought about the proper way to respond to cultural and social diversity.

In recent years practitioners in a wide variety of fields -scientific cooperation, academic research, business, management, education, health, culture, politics, diplomacy, development, and others- have realized just how important intercultural communication is for their everyday work. Fast travel, international media, and the Internet have made it easy for us to communicate with people all over the world. The process of economic globalization means that we cannot function in isolation but must interact with the rest of the world for survival. The global nature of many widely diverse modern problems and issues such as the environment, governance of the Internet, poverty and international terrorism call for cooperation between nations. Intercultural communication is no longer an option, but a necessity.

Because important decisions in business, politics, education, health, and culture these days usually affect citizens of more than one nation, the question of whether communication between people of different nations is effective and whether all parties emerge with the same understanding is of crucial importance. Individuals who deal with people from other cultures want to learn how to improve their performance through improving their communication skills. Numerous resources have sprung up to meet this emerging market in the business, academic, education and international relations communities: leading authors have written books and articles on the topic; business services provide consultation for improving the conduct of international business; universities and other educational institutions offer programs or degrees in Intercultural Communication and Cosmopolitism; and researchers have established international journals and academic societies specializing in research on intercultural communication. In fact, intercultural communication has become a business in itself. Following is just an example: Richard Lewis Communications is a company owned by the author of the popular When Cultures Collide: Managing Successfully Across Cultures. They offer business consultancy, run “cross-cultural training” courses and workshops, publish papers and workbooks, and develop software for intercultural communication. Richard Lewis provides a truly global and practical guide to working and communicating across cultures: ”Working in a global team and dealing with business partners or customers across cultures raises challenges and demands new attitudes and skills. Our experience shows that without the right approach, cultural differences greatly reduce effectiveness in the early stages of a relationship. But active management of the internationalization process and a conscious effort to acquire new skills will release fresh sources of competitive advantage. Lack of knowledge of another culture can lead, at the best, to embarrassing or amusing mistakes in communication. At the worst, such mistakes may confuse or even offend the people we wish to communicate with, making the conclusion of business deals or international agreements difficult or impossible.”

Through the exploration of other cultural identities opportunities are provided to recognize points of similarity between cultures that may be hidden from view or not immediately apparent. The focus is on exploring where cultures meet and developing knowledge, skills, attitudes and values that enable interaction and negotiation between cultures. This process of coming to an understanding of others requires self-reflection and the confrontation and deconstruction of sometimes deeply embedded stereotypical views. It challenges both students and faculty to understand how views are constructed and to appreciate that views about oneself are constructed in relation to how we see each other.

Multicultural education is an interdisciplinary, cross-curricular education that contributes to the preparation for students to live and work in a diverse environment. As cross-cultural appreciation and respect become increasingly important in a globalized, interdependent world, it is imperative that students develop an understanding of cultures outside of their own. Multicultural education provides an avenue for schools to develop cultural awareness among their student bodies. Intercultural/ Multicultural education is about developing an understanding of and valuing others and about understanding of and valuing self. It provides opportunities to gain an insight into one’s own knowledge, limits, doubts and attitudes by confronting, interacting and negotiating with other cultures. This requires developing an understanding of why we see the world in the way we do. It allows students to break through their prejudices and get to know something of the actual person behind the stereotype. These types of educational programmers help young people recognize the sensitivity of talking about strongly held beliefs, and the consequences of not handling them with care, particularly the problems that occur when disagreement escalates into conflict or violence.

Perhaps the most common invocations of the label ‘cosmopolitan’ in recent philosophical literature have been in the disputes over cultural cosmopolitanism. Especially with disputes over multiculturalism in educational curricula and with resurgent nationalisms, cultural claims and counter-claims have received much attention. The cosmopolitan position in both of these kinds of disputes rejects exclusive attachments to parochial culture. So on the one hand, the cosmopolitan encourages cultural diversity and appreciates a multicultural blend, and on the other hand, the cosmopolitan rejects a strong nationalism. In staking out these claims, the cosmopolitan must be cautious about very strong ‘rights to culture,’ respecting the rights of minority cultures while rebuffing the right to unconditional national self-determination. Hence, recent advocates of ‘liberal nationalism’ (e.g., Margalit and Raz,) or of the rights of minority cultures (e.g., Kymlicka) generally seem to be anti-cosmopolitan. But the cosmopolitan’s wariness towards very strong rights to culture and towards national self-determination need not be grounded in a wholesale skepticism about the importance of parochial cultural attachments. Cosmopolitanism can acknowledge the importance of (at least some kinds of) cultural attachments for the good human life (at least within certain limits), while denying that this implies that a person’s cultural identity should be defined by any bounded or homogeneous subset of the cultural resources available in the world (e.g., Waldron).

Cosmopolitan cultural identity is introduced across the global and the local, encompassing questions of cultural mastery, mobility, traveling, tourism, and home and nation-state attachments. Cosmopolitanism, containing but also furthering the notion of interculturalism, could constitute an alternative to or complement for ‘cross-cultural education’ in theory or practice, especially via its element of ‘multiculturalism’. The explicit reference of cosmopolitanism to the development of the individual, in contrast to institutionalized frameworks, opens up further usefulness for intercultural education. The cosmopolitanism with the concept “to be concerned for another as I am concerned for myself” — is integral in nature: it contains the conceptual agenda that is common to most cosmopolitan perceptions; it allows them to exist alongside one another; and it encourages a normative, systematic outlook in man – the concern for another for the “good of the whole” – since people are essentials in one connected human system.

This approach is pragmatic in that it suggests a practical solution not only to interpersonal challenges but also to intercultural challenges. The “vision of the good” that overwhelms society demands treatment first before structural changes. A suitable response requires an educational, moral and conscious shift among the citizens of the world. Each person must recognize that his destiny is dependent on his relations with others, meaning anyone outside himself. When openness and concern are placed for others at the top of society’s agenda, when that will be the defining principle for curriculum at the university, there will be immediate progress in the society. People will form an open approach to the world within themselves – a kind of cosmopolitan prism through which they can judge their actions toward fellow people – and it will bring about the change in spheres such as economy, migration, environment, communication, security and more. The cosmopolitan integral education can provide an alternative to the various private affairs. This is a massive mission, that is obligating citizens of the world to engage in mutually beneficial relationships rather than relationships of advantage and distance. Today, even from the most egoistic perspective it is worthwhile to be concerned for the public since future is dependent upon people of the world. (Kapstein & Rosenthal 2009)

Susie Michailidis Ph.D. Professor is Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs at the University of Indianapolis, Athens.

Bibliography:

- Benhabib, Seyla. The Claims of Culture: 
Equality and Diversity in the Global Era. Princeton University Press 2002

- Kapstein, E. B., & Rosenthal, J. H.Ethics and International Relations. Farnham, Ashgate, 2009

- Kymlicka, Will. Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.

- Lewis, Richard. When Cultures Collide: Managing Successfully Across Cultures London: Nicholas Brealey, 1993.

- MacIntyre, Alas dair. “Is Patriotism a Virtue?” In Theorizing Citizenship, ed. Ronald Beiner , 209-228. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1995.

- Margalit, Avishai, and Joseph Raz. “National Self-Determination.” Journal of Philosophy 87 (1990): 439-61.

- Mason, Andrew. “Special Obligations to Compatriots.” Ethics 107: 427-447,1997.

- O’Neill, Onora. Bounds of Justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.

- Rex, Martin and Reidy, David, eds. Rawls’s Law of Peoples: A Realistic Utopia?. Malden: Blackwell, 2006.

- Tan Kok-Chor. Justice Without Borders: Cosmopolitanism, Nationalism, and Patriotism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.

- Waldron, J., “Superseding Historic Injustice,” Ethics, 103(1): 4–28, 1992.

- Waldron, J. “Minority Cultures and the Cosmopolitan Alternative,” in The Rights of Minority Cultures, Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1995.

When I was first offered the practicum at Alyunanaia, my first thought was to revive a non–intrusive observation I did a bit less than a year ago on Athenian street prostitution and turn it into a field research backed with proper interviews and questionnaires. Nonetheless, I was strictly advised by my inside source not to do so for security reasons. Therefore, the aim of this field report was developed into looking at various aspects of the issue of racism and racial relations in several Athenian strip clubs by utilizing several research methods, mainly interviews and observations.

A Hopeful Sojourner: My Inside Source

I met Blessing (pseudo name), a former sex worker and a stripper, after a Sunday Mass at a church she regularly attends. One of the church’s clergymen—an energetic public speaker who was able to keep the congregation drawn to him throughout the two-hour Mass I attended—was kind enough to introduce us to each other, so that she would help me with my endeavor to comprehend the racial dynamics of her previous workplace.

Blessing is from a big African family of eleven. Like many of her hometown peers who endured abject poverty, she grew up hearing stories about how good life in Europe was. Finally, her dream materialized when she was in her early twenties; she came to Athens on a tourist visa that she overstayed till she legalized her residency status later on. I was shocked to know that her visa did cost her a sizable sum of 40 thousand EUR that she spent four years paying off.

Burdened by this huge debt, Blessing was desperate to find a job the minute she stepped foot in Greece. As she told me, she was very afraid that if she didn’t pay back the money on time “someone [(of those who got her the visa]) is gonna hurt [her] family.” Hence, she had no other choice but to work in the sex industry. She got her first job as a stripper at a club in a quiet town that is approximately three hours away from Athens. There, as she told me, she faced a fair share of racism and harassment. She was sometimes singled out by some customers because of her color. She even got physically harassed by a drunken teenager who thought that it was funny to call her a “slave” in front of everyone. The incident, regrettably, went unpunished.

To make ends meet, besides performing at the club, Blessing slept with customers procured, or at least approved, by her bosses. Although she needed the money really bad, Blessing did not sleep with just whomever. She agreed to bed only those whom she “kinda” liked. But, in our second session, her previous statement appeared to me as self-compensation in disguise, for when I inquired about the number of customers she slept with prior to quitting the business, she answered: “more than I can remember.”

Dangerous Encounters

Blessing gained more experience and insight on the business, as she, throughout her nine-year career, worked for as many as ten strip clubs. Her experience left her convinced that even the police, who are supposed to treat everyone equally, “view all black [women] as prostitute[s].” For instance, once, after quitting stripping, she had to go to the police station to deliver a passport to friend of hers who had been detained because she did not have an identity document on her when stopped by the police. When Blessing arrived with her friend’s passport, one of the policemen asked her in English about what she did for a living. Before she got the chance to answer, another policeman replied in Greek: “she is black; she works on the street[s].” When she protested the man’s answer, he firmly told her: “you are black; that is your job.” Such an incident does reflect the haunting racial tension in a once-hospitable country that, according to Amnesty, witnessed “a dramatic rise in the number of racially motivated attacks throughout 2012,” as Russia Today reports.

Away from the common scrutiny of law enforcement, even when the lights are dimmer and people are intoxicated into friendliness, even glamorous places of pleasure can somehow be hostile to a black folk. Blessing informed me that most black strippers are disempowered by three basic practices that are common in her ex workplace. First, no strip club would usually hire more than three black strippers. Most of them hire one or two. Second, customers generally treat white strippers noticeably better than they do treat black strippers, because customers usually desire the former more, an assertion that can explain Blessing’s first claim. Third, usually, white strippers—mostly eastern European—by virtue of their color and language, stick together and spend most of their unaccompanied time in the club in groups. On the other hand, black strippers, spend most of their time alone, as they mostly find no other fellow black stripper to spend time with when unescorted. Expectedly, this makes them feel lonely and vulnerable. When visiting several strip clubs in Athens, many of the aforementioned claims were verifiable through interviews, casual talks, and observations.

Glamorous Encounters

In order to verify the claims put forward by Blessing, I have visited four different known strip clubs in Athens. Three of these clubs did indeed provide me with an insight on the subject matter of this field report. The first place I visited was something between a bar and a brothel. Upon entering, one could see the escort girls sitting at the bar eyeing newcomers. The girls offer either their company at the table or sexual services in special rooms on the second floor of the bar. There was only one black girl sitting by herself at the bar next to a couple of white girls conversing together two chairs away from her. No contact between the black girl and her white counterparts was observed. During my conversation with the girl, she seemed to be very secretive about her country of origin. Despite the fact that her accent clearly indicated the part of Africa she is from, she insisted that she is from Latin America.  No matter how hard I tried to steer the conversation away from the casual business and pricing talk, the girl kept a firm attitude not to involve herself in any kind of talks irrelevant to business. When the drink I offered her finished and her time was up, she politely bade us farewell and headed back to the bar only to sit alone again. On the other hand, the white girl—who sat with us along with the aforementioned black escort—immediately, when her time was up, headed back directly to her friend only to continue chatting and laughing. The two ladies (the black and the white escorts) did not have any kind of contact during their stay with us at the table. We stayed there for more than thirty minutes after the girls departed, and yet we couldn’t observe any interaction or contact between the black escort girl, on the one hand, and the other white ones, on the other. This, though might be a bit superficial, seems to confirm Blessing’s claim that in the workplace, black stripper are always outnumbered and alienated.

The second place we visited did not have any black strippers at all, in spite of the fact that it had a huge number of white workers. One of the white girls who escorted us was from an eastern European country. She struck me as intelligent and well-spoken; later, I learned that she had a degree in law from a well-known state university in her home country. Her pretty face with all of its friendly features changed when I asked her if they had any black girls around. She, in a very cold manner, told me that they did not. The minute I told her that I think that black girls were beautiful, she appeared to lose interest in me. She made it clear that she did not only find black girls undesirable, but also she found it bizarre that someone thought they were desirable. Throughout the ninety minutes we spent there, we could not spot any black girl.

The last place we visited was quite bigger than any of the ones we had previously stepped foot in. They had an enormous amount of white girls and only one black girl. Prior to my conversation with the latter, I could observe that she did not have any contact with the white girls. She was standing in the corner by herself till a customer offered her a drink, an invitation that she overstayed by the standards of her workplace. A small drink with one of the white girls lasts for a maximum of twenty minutes. She stayed with the customer for more than thirty five minutes for one drink. As soon as I could, I invited her to our table for a short interview. She informed me that there are no black girls around but her, and that she had no friends at all, but also she did not have any enemies. In contrast to the white stripper I had talked to earlier in the other club, she told me that she cannot wait to quit her job after saving the amount of money she needed. As we were talking, I noticed that only white girls performed solo dances on the central stage. When I asked her if she had ever performed solo, she said that she did but only for a brief amount of time, adding that it is not really usual for black girls to perform solo. She further informed me about her plan to get products from a northern American country and sell them in her home country in Africa. Above all, she was very open about her life, contrary to the African girl I had spoken to earlier and even to my inside contact who made me work hard to earn her trust. After conversing with me for more than forty five minutes, she left to continue doing business. The only observable social interaction she had was with the marginalized workers at the club, such as the cleaning staff and the lady who was in charge of the rest rooms.

Words into Places

After paying a visit to several strip clubs in Athens and through observation, interviews, and casual talks, the three aspects of disempowerment of black workers illustrated by Blessing, my inside source, could be substantiated. First, the fact that black strippers are outnumbered to the degree of disempowerment is observable in their apparent social alienation. Two out of the four places inspected over the course of this field research did not have any black strippers at all. The other two had only one black girl each. As observed, as a result, these girls spend most of their time lonely and unaccompanied, unless called upon by a customer. Second, the claim that customers prefer white girls can be traceable in the fact that the central stages of all of the visited clubs are exclusively white spaces where only white girls perform solo. Third, the product of these socio-racial dynamics is a by-default, auto-forced social reality in which performers in strip joints are kept segregated into racial groups: the white girls, on the one hand, and the alienated African stripper—rarely strippers—on the other.

A critique of this field research can be drawn from the fact that this investigation in some way does not provide a wide range of testimonies and case studies to back up the main premises of the core argument. However, given the nature of the topic and the restrictions imposed by the environment (the scarcity of black workers in Athenian gentlemen’s clubs and the dangers stemming from directly talking to street prostitutes), one cannot adequately probe into such a question, unless a lot of financial resources and inside connections are available. In the light of all of that, this field research remains a humble attempt to engage the question of racial relations among strippers working in Athens.

The rhetoric suggesting the replacement of ‘Grexit’ with ‘Grecovery’ is nice, albeit lacking political and – most importantly – real life substance.

Truly, psychology is a great part of economic progress and an essential ingredient of a success story not only in national politics, but at individual level too. However, the critical question, whose answer could dictate the strategic target, is: whose psychology needs improvement? Foreign investors’, local politicians or the people’s?

Greeks are usually extrovert and communicative. Even in the last three years, during which they have lost a great deal of their income and almost 3 out of 10 are out of a job, there’s a lot of talk amongst citizens regarding their problems and limitations, incomes lost; they cite even specific figures to illustrate their point; they are not even embarrassed to mention restrictions they have placed upon their lives in order to cope: less vacation, less dining out, even less consumables.

These are some of the talks they prefer to have face-to-face. Online, they prefer to curse politicians.

Since 2010, Greek Facebook has been transformed from a social platform of triviality into a forum for the exchange of serious, bitter and primarily personal views on the crisis.

Government and politicians’ behaviour rarely escape scrutiny and criticism in the social networks’ realm. These days, common sense and the wisdom of the masses seem to be the Prime Minister’s staffers primary adversary.

Amongst the most cursed statement online is former PASOK minister Theodore Pangalos’ saying that all Greeks are responsible for the deficits and the national debt. “We ate the money together,” he said, causing a media frenzy, attracting all sorts of negative comments (and the occasional yogurt attacks) from people seeing their salaries and pensions trimmed.

If Pangalos’ statement has an iota of truth, then what could follow this perspective may get more consensus amongst weary Greeks; namely, a phrase like: “we need to recover all together”. What does this mean? It does not mean, of course, returning pensions and salaries at their original levels; even Alexis Tsipras knows that this case is cold. Neither that problems would vanish over night.

It simply means that improvements in psychology should be recorded across the board, horizontally, in the same manner income cuts were introduced by recurring austerity measures. Either this means street safety, elimination of red tape, grassroots entrepreneurship or favorable personal debt settlements for those in need or even a real boost of pubic sentiment through credible information via an efficient and honest governmental communication strategy, citizens really need something solid to continue.

It should be noted here, that one of the biggest omissions and eventually strategic mistakes of Samaras’ government is that, even today, after a year in power, the Greek West Wing continues to lack a modern government website that could set the agenda straight and really explain the crisis to citizens. Unfortunately, this is something Maximos Mansion staffers fail to acknowledge for a series of reasons. One reason is a superiority complex that characterises those who believe they can control people through old style manipulative techniques. Another is the lack of strategic thinking and knowledge as regards the digital economy, and most importantly, its significance for social capital, namely people and their connections, on Facebook and elsewhere.

The quite recent draft bill for the interim Public TV organisation verifies the strategic choices that keep an unexplained distance from the digital realm and quite evidently, from the Greek youth.

To be fair, however, to those guys who took over the task of keeping the Greek boat afloat in the middle of an unprecedented social and economic storm, I should note that thinking – and of course acting – politically in the context of the crisis is an unbearable task; especially when you are an old dog refusing to learn new tricks. At the same time, the fact that political personnel wishes to maintain the perks of clientelism and the patronage system makes the whole effort a quite messy process.

Citizens are not asleep anymore. The great sleep occurred during the last 30 years, in what Greeks call ‘Metapolitefsi’ to indicate the post-Junta period of calmness and peace. Nowadays, old style partisan behaviour is laughed at on social networks and the awareness effect backfires on the face of the communicator.

The creation of a success story that could expand across the country and eventually persuade foreign decision makers is not one that will start from the top, despite the increase of foreign direct investments. The national success story will be the result of a series of smaller ones, which will emerge from all over the country in different fields Greece holds a competitive advantage. These stories could cover any field that requires innovative decision-making and intellectual breakthroughs. These success stories will be the result of citizens taking things in their own hand; in cooperatives or individually.

Greece is characterized by an abundance of resources, what economists call ‘external economies’, which (even excluding the hydrocarbon saga) constitute a vast amount of unexplored GDP on land, in the air and at sea.

What is missing is an honest way to put all things together in a coherent and inspiring saga, away from the misery of partisan priorities and corporatist interests.

Dr. Demetris Kamaras is the Editor of Alyunaniya.com

In 1920 Muslims were more than 15% of the population of the “Great Greece”. In fact, they were the big majority in a lot of regions.

Greece, in contrast with the Neo-Turks, did not follow a policy of systematic ethnic cleansing but an impressive policy of support of the moderate Muslims whose the peak was the law 2345/1920 “About the temporary Great Mufti and the Muftis of the Greek Muslims”. Eleftherios Venizelos himself, nominated a Muslim as the first prefect of liberated Adrianople while in a series of documents of the Greek Government, the Muslims are characterized as “peaceful and easy to be administrated people”.

All the Greek governments have given the same answer to the essential question “which is the best way to treat the Muslims” for 132 years: a) full support to the emergence of the moderate Muslims as privileged allies of the Greek State, b) support of their religious freedom and identity and c) maintenance of the Saria. This policy is more promoted even compared to what is done by the Muslim countries like Turkey.

The only exception in this general policy were the periods that Greece was trying to ensure the support of Turkey against Italy and Bulgaria. It was then when the Muslims of Thrace were left in the hands of the “Grey Wolves” (Turkish nationalist movement) with the known results.

Even when Turkey completed the policies of the extermination of the Greeks, Greece did not turn against the Muslims of Thrace. It did not turn the genocide into a confrontation between “Christians – Muslims”.

On the contrary, it invested seriously, in a long term period and effectively in the development of special relations with the Arabic world but also with Iran. The peak of this policy were the decisions of Andreas Papandreou for the support of the Palestinians and especially of the PLO when all the others had turned their backs against them. 184 countries and 1,8 billions of people must not follow the Turks.

The role of our Orthodox Religion has been especially crucial throughout this course. Greece has got an invaluable position and importance, thanks to the most ancient Patriarchates, which doesn’t seem to fully understand and this is a sample of our fundamental weakness to manage successfully the heritage of the glorious Byzantium.

What has Greece won out of this policy?

A) in 1920/1923 the Muslims of Thrace asked by themselves to be incorporated in the Greek state, b) despite the restless efforts of Kemal Ataturk and the Bulgarians, the Muslims of Thrace did not form partisan groups behind the lines of the Greek army in 1920-1922, c) Greece holds the unique example in the whole Europe of a native Muslim minority settled in its borders which has not only caused problems but during the war of 1940-41 against Italy and Germany it did in full its patriotic duty (how many people know that there are war memorials for killed in action Muslims or that Muslims have been awarded medals for their bravery in the battle?), d) Greece has a very good image in the Muslim and in particular in the Arabic world despite the permanent efforts of Turkey to destroy it, e) it did never enter the map of the “enemies of Islam”.

What does Greece jeopardise today

The way in which the Nazis of the Golden Dawn are moving has already created important cracks in the big success of Greece and threatens to lead to devastation the most successful policy of management of the Islam in the whole Europe.

Our essential difference with the Westerners is that the State played a fundamental role for the organisation and the support of Islam not leaving thus any vital space for its radicalisation, in contrast with the western tactics of “laissez faire”. It is completely incomprehensible for which reason, especially since 2000 and afterwards, we have been doing everything we can to imitate the fundamental errors of the Westerners.

At the same time, incredible lies are disseminated in the internet starting from mentioning completely unrealistic numbers of Muslim immigrants in Athens and reaching the invocation of statements of Arabic Islam distinguished figures who even if they died in 1949, are mentioned to have said in the year 2013, that they want to see “the Islamic flag on the Greek islands” again!

The Greek extreme right and especially the two dictators Metaxas (1936-1941) and Papadopoulos (1967-1974), was neither anti-Semitic nor anti-Islamic. They both followed the permanent Greek policy of supporting the moderate Muslims and did never allow the development of anti-semitic ideas. During the Papadopoulos governance a special agreement of immigration with Pakistan was signed, having as a result the fact that the Pakistan community in Athens be one of the oldest. The Greek extreme right should not be unwisely and hastily identical to the Nazis of the Golden Dawn.

The policy of the Golden Dawn about the Islam (from its identification with the problem of immigration and the construction of the Mosque to the motorised marches in Muslim villages of Thrace) serves the Turkish strategy to present our country as an anti – islamic state, it jeopardizes the position of the Orthodox Patriarchates in the Arabic world, undermines the peace and the social cohesion in Thrace, weakens the position of Cyprus and opens the way to a provocation against the Muslim people in a Greek territory.

The potential victimiser or perpetrator, in order to be able to take a human life, firstly dehumanises himself and afterwards the “opponent”. This ideological procedure progresses intensively (“the immigrants are deplorable and subhumans who carry every kind of illnesses”, E. Zaroulia member of the parliamentary group of the Golden Dawn 18/10/2012). Many people think that the racist texts dominating especially the internet are just words without danger. They make a fatal mistake. In 1999, in a period of big prosperity and with the racist sermons having a much smaller audience than today, Greece experienced an unprecedented racist crime when a 23-year-old Greek man with a permanent job shot people in cold blood just for one reason: the colour of their skin. One man died, two were left paraplegic and four were heavily wounded. That was the result of this action. One insane man inspired by sermons, as those of the Golden Dawn, is enough in a period of crisis to immerse a country in a cycle of racist or religious violence.

We have already very serious problems; let us not commit suicide humiliating the history and our culture.

Dr. George Kalantzis is General Secretary of Religious Affairs, Ministry of Education.

On the same tune, Hellenic Federation of Enterprises chief Dimitris Daskalopoulos last week once again confirmed his critical stance towards the ND-led government; he argued that it was about time Greece to start negotiating “in a smarter, more strategic and more long-term manner, instead of wasting our time on petty bargaining over procedural adjustments.” The next day, Kathimerini editorial comment reprimanded SEV’s chief, noting that the head of Greek entrepreneurs’ union falls dramatically below expectations. “The public of this crisis-hit country expects the business community to seize the initiative and point the way toward a new manner of doing business that is not dependent on state subsidies and handouts, and that will lead to real growth, which is key to Greece’s recovery. What it is getting instead from representatives of the private sector, is a lot of complaining and never-ending political chatter,” the paper noted.

Well, Greece definitely needs both, namely smarter ways for the government to strategise and negotiate with the troika representatives, as well as sharp entrepreneurship that would invest on local advantages by moving forward, away from the obsolete local paradigm.

Under a positive prism, Greece has a unique opportunity to restructure its political and economic norms and draw a line with its futile recent past. It has a chance to start over and make a difference across the EU, adopting contemporary social responsibility concerns and ground breaking multi-facet corporate practices in key fields of the economy and business such as quality tourism, education, health services, transports, energy, to name a few.

Either reconfiguring its local presence or expanding to Libya, Egypt or elsewhere, Greek entrepreneurship has to seize the opportunity of the crisis and come up with a new way of doing business by designing a new economic paradigm.

Labour statistics describe a shift in the corporate field; more recruits than layoffs in the private sector suggest a little less pessimism amongst companies in Greece. A steady increase in economic sentiment also points forward, not back. The unemployment rate, on the other hand –the highest amongst EU members- hinders any attempt to node with certainty towards growth. INEE-GSEE, the top union think tank predicts unemployment to reach a devastating 30%, whilst IOBE’s head recently talked about high Greek unemployment being unsustainable. This means that long term unemployed people are distancing themselves from the market with few possibilities for a return.

In the Greek crisis, structural unemployment is part of change, albeit of dramatic nature. Fifty-year-old blue and white collars, kicked out due to the crisis from jobs that ceased to exist, will probably never find the same job again, unless the sector manages a quick come back. Although this cannot be ruled out, primarily due to the volatility of change itself, the wise thing to do is those people to capitalize on their experience, by forming teams of diverse specialties that could invest on new small-medium entrepreneurship; they could even attract generous funding, depending on their business plan.

Quite recently Qatar and Greece started talking about a joint venture capital that would invest on SMEs. The Qataris know that innovation and added value business ideas will emerge from small teams of people who will combine their efforts towards a common goal. The faster the coalition government decides to allow these efforts to flourish -by drastically cutting red tape, opening up protected professions and digitizing state services- the sooner Greeks will start producing new money.

What analysts still refuse to put in the equation is politicians’ ability to inspire people and trigger change. Cannot blame them for thinking less of political actors who have failed to protect their voters from clientelism and petty interests. However, for the time being, politicians in Greece are the only group of people that have the power to turn things around, protecting what’s left from their credibility. To manage that, they should rule like there is no tomorrow – for them, not the country.

Dr. Demetris Kamaras is the Editor of Alyunaniya.com

Researcher, author, and professor Philomena Essed wrote that: “Racial oppression is inherent in the nature of the social order…the real drama is not racism but the fact that racism is an everyday problem. …racism is transmitted in routine practices that seem ‘normal,’ at least for the dominant group, this can only mean that racism is often not recognized, not acknowledged-let alone  not considered a problem by the dominant group.”

Some of the roots of racism are economic. When people are scared, desperate and frightened, they scapegoat people and allow latent feelings of racism to surface. Another is the attitude of superiority that individuals and groups feel over others.  Race and racism are socially constructed.  We are not born racists; it is learned behavior based on lack of exposure to diversity, ignorance, and/or fear.  Racists focus on what they perceive as differences among people, when in fact there is very little.  Instead of the word “differences,” let’s use the word individual uniqueness.  Scientists have shown that there is little genetic difference between people who have been grouped as belonging to different races.  In fact scientists have proven that 99% of the human genome is the same in everyone.  Genetic differences are more within groups than between groups.  We are all one coming from the same African ancestry.

Prejudice, discrimination stereotyping are all elements of racism.  The term race in itself is non-specific.

Stereotyping anyone because of their race, ethnicity or color and based on those assumptions commit acts of discrimination, prejudice and/or violence against others; is unacceptable and should never be tolerated.

A form of this is what is commonly known as racial profiling; in the United States it is called  “driving, walking or shopping while black.” In other words the crime; being black. Generally, racial profiling, is associated with people in authority, like the police and government but anyone who sees individuals be it refugees, immigrants, or other people of color or different ethnicities and based on some preconceptions about these individuals determines that it is their right to attack, insult, threaten harass, detain, arrest, etc., when that person has done nothing to warrant this kind of attention except to be “unique” in appearance.

Many who are people of color, refugees or immigrants including myself are constantly being stopped on the streets or at the boarding pass checkpoint at the airport and harassed when nothing has been done to raise suspicion.  The only factor is that the person being stopped is ethnic or of color.

I would like to recount a story published in the New York Times about everyday racism, recently, well known actor, producer and director Forest Whitaker of The Last King of Scotland, one of his popular films, was at a deli on the upper west side of Manhattan near Columbia university when he was approached by an employee and accused of shoplifting and then searched by this employee, of course nothing was found, for he is not a thief.  The owner of the deli said it was a sincere mistake made by a decent man who was just doing his job!

Minorities are subject to these accusations and indignities and to even more devastating attacks of violence daily.   The media glare comes when the victim is Forest Whitaker, an Oscar winner. But it does not matter if you are wealthy, professional, a student, a worker, unemployed or a refugee you are seen and treated as someone different because of your color or ethnicity and not as a valued and unique human being.

Racism is insidious; it eats at both the perpetrator and the victim. It exists everywhere; it is attitude, behavior, feelings that take root within each of us from experiences, family, and socialization.  Racism is not innate; people are not born with racist feelings, these are learned!

When you hear someone say I am not racist or I have no racist feelings, unfortunately, they seem to have forgotten we live in a world where we are taught hatred or we feel threaten and we blame others for that fear and others become the target or recipient of these feelings.  The financial crisis, the loss of jobs, becomes the excuse for allowing these dormant feelings of racism to be exposed.  The world is diverse and the majority of the world’s populations are people of color. We live in a world of globalization where people are moving and immigrating from country to country. Yet racism is alive and well around the world.  It is subtle and overt such as calling people derogatory names, refusing to rent or sell to immigrants or foreigners, telling people to go back where they came from, that they are all dirty or that they are filled with disease or criminals.  And another confirmation of harboring racist feelings is when a person say that they don’t have racist feelings because “my best friend is African” or worse yet, to be told I don’t see color and you are different not like the others! We blame the victim for causing the oppression or being responsible for the racist behavior of others.

People move to another country, live and work in that country, have children yet cannot get residency let alone citizenship despite their contribution to their new homeland.

Each of us is responsible individually for the continued perpetuation of racism unless we decide to do something about it.  Ending racism begins and ends with each of us.  We all must become aware of and acknowledge these toxic attitudes and behaviors and stop denying their existence.  Because until we all make this acknowledgement, we cannot and will not do anything to change or confront this plague on our society and culture.

Racism is not new for it has existed for centuries around the world.  Unfortunately, today in the year 2013 in the 21st century because of racism we are still experiencing a world where men, women and children continue to be excluded from living fully as human beings, actualizing their dreams, achieving their goals and contributing to improving this world.

The doctrine of racism is not on the wane, it is getting new recruits and gaining increased popularity and acceptance. We can’t allow racism to continue to grow and take root in our society. There is no excuse or justification for racism of any kind anywhere.

We must all work to end its existence, and everywhere we find it, we must condemn and defeat it.

What is clear here is that racism and I repeat is universal and is in the minds and hearts of “good people”.  Those who continuously state and insist they are not racists or have racist feelings. Good people, who do nothing, good people who remain silent in the face of racist behavior.

Let’s confront racists; let’s do our part to change not only our attitudes but also those of others to the damaging effects of racism in our world.  We must all take responsibility for its continuation we have a duty to do our part to end the nightmare of racial discrimination and to change history.

“Silence in the face of racists assaults are acts of complicity” and finally a quote by Maya Angelou “we all should know that diversity makes for a rich tapestry, and we must understand that all the threads of the tapestry are equal in value no matter what their color.”

Three years ago, the crisis exploded in the hands of George Papandreou. It was the result, however, of many years of shameful politics. Antonis Karakousis in tovima.gr has described the national failure during the last three decades in a few paragraphs. He wrote (02.03.2013): “In 1981, Andreas Papandreou assumed power promising inter alia to “change things”. Change actually did occur, some of those promised were delivered, but most of his policy announcements remained unfulfilled or proved ineffective. A part of the electorate was surely satisfied; however Papandreou failed to boost the economy or achieve significant progress for the country.

The real change was attempted after 1985, when his economic policy had collapsed and he had to endorse that of the European Union, which provided funding and rescued the economy. Then the Stabilisation and Growth Programme developed by Costas Simitis – then Economy minister – attempted the first big steps to exercise control over public finances. That 3-year project was based on the slogan “We spend more than we produce.”

Karakousis noted: “During the first year the programme was implemented by Costas Simitis, harsh measures were decided that caused a lot of reaction. In the second year, some elements of growth started to appear. The third year of the programme was about streamlining public finances. At the end of 1987 the field was dominated by debates on the budget, taxes and tax evasion. Finally, Papandreou expelled Simitis and the crowd was satisfied because the “heartless” Minister of Finance was gone. Later on, in 1988 the scandals dominated public agenda and public finances derailed. In the elections of 1989, Papandreou maximized clientelism practices and soon after deficit’s revenge came. In early 1990, the Greek state had run out of money and started borrowing with a 27% rate in order to pay salaries and pensions.

The next effort to consolidate fiscal finances by Costas Mitsotakis was not concluded due to political reasons. Then, another effort by FinMin Alekos Papadopoulos in 1994 got lost three years later in 1997 due to populist notions that prevailed in the then leading political class. Since then all efforts undertaken were incomplete and have failed, hence today’s near-bankruptcy situation…”

A similar analogy (to include also a few more PMs not previously mentioned) can be simply put as follows: deficits – clientelism – more deficits – populism – missed opportunities – timidity – political amateurism.

For foreign technocrats and scientists, Greece is a mystery. When the working hypothesis necessarily assimilates the country’s Eurozone membership, the analysts’ despair grows even further; in their minds, disaster scenarios are almost a certainty. Of course, those Nobel laureates who promised investors the bankruptcy of Greece proved to be quite wrong. Recently, one of them was forced to admit publicly that the assessment was incorrect. But was it?

Scientifically speaking it was not wrong, since, no matter how one makes the calculations, the figures “do not add up,” despite Stournaras’ confidence that within the year, or early 2014, there will be a primary surplus. What does this mean? Nothing more than that Greece will stop borrowing money to live. What follows is the need for a rapid reduction of debt, which if not achieved via a new haircut, it requires a spectacular GDP growth over the next ten years or so.

Nobel laureates and domestic politicized economists (Stournaras, Milios, Varoufakis and others) probably acknowledge that achieving such a GDP jump is a mission impossible for a country in which the ruling party of the day considers citizens (and their occupations) as election target groups and reigns depending on the electoral cycle. Moreover, this time, growth will not come from increased consumption of indigenous buyers. This is over; credit cards with predatory interest rates, and seasonal consumer loans that in the past have fueled the market and Greek banks’ easy profits are obsolete.

Growth will emerge from serious and innovative investments that can attract quality visitors (on a seasonal or permanent basis) and produce goods and services that target foreign markets. This effort requires the use of the well-known ‘comparative advantages of the country’, and involves novelty, originality, design, and communication effectiveness.

All these are not associated with ideology (to exclude the communist fairytale). The whole case is simply a matter of efficiency, in order the country to be able to exploit its comparative advantages, which -fortunately- are largely independent from the actions of Greeks. The rest is shoddy propaganda stemming from vested interests or originating from the need for group psychotherapy within party walls, depending on anyone’s prism.

The way out of the vicious circle of deficits, failure and inefficient politics require drastic solutions. It mainly requires a large proportion of Greek politicians to decide to sacrifice themselves on the altar of crisis management.

This will be the beginning of the end of the Greek problem.

Dr. Demetris Kamaras is the Editor of Alyunaniya.com

Developing an economic, energy in this case, investment presupposes geopolitical stability and security. In the case of Cyprus, in order to sustain its economic collaboration with Israel Nicosia needs to address the role of the Arabs in this volatile region. In the case of the Syrian civil war, given that there is nothing particular to win or lose, Cyprus must pursue a neutral policy.

Along with the Cyprus issue, the case of Palestine remains for more than a century the top theme in the security agenda of the region. In particular the Palestinian case is an issue of Pan-Islamic dimensions, well-interwoven with Arab nationalism. Given the rise of Islam in Turkey and the Arab states, such as Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria, Nicosia needs to develop a new policy scheme toward the Arabs in order to contribute to the stability of the region, aiming to facilitate further dialogue between Israel and the Palestinians. For instance President Christofias and Foreign Minister Marcoulli’s recent visits to Jordan and Egypt respectively are of particular importance.

Besides the solid outcome that such a Cypriot initiative may have in terms of diplomacy and security, it is also expected that Nicosia will win hearts and minds in the Arab world and Israel in a very delicate moment for Arab and Israeli politics. In short the current Cypriot-Israeli economic collaboration is a first class opportunity for Nicosia to amplify its political role in the region by working to bring together friends and foes. Cyprus is able to undertake such a task and carry it out effectively for the interests of Nicosia and the region as a whole.

Dr. Evangelos Venetis (The Middle East Research Project, ELIAMEP) is currently a Senior Research Associate in Islamic and Iranian studies at the School of Asian, African and Amerindian Studies, the University of Leiden, the Netherlands. He holds a PhD in Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies from the Department of Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies, the University of Edinburgh, UK.

In the middle of the last century, research has been done in the U.S. to determine whether there is any quality difference between individual and collective decisions taken, as it is known, only through one way, with referendums and the application of the majority principle.

The results of these investigations were known as the “paradox of voting” [i].

The paradox was the finding that there are systematic and significant differences between the quality of individual and the quality of collective decisions taken with the referendums. These differences are summarized as follows:

1. Individual decisions are understandable, reasonable and usually reach the best possible choice.

2. Collective decisions by referendums are sometimes unpredictable, non-understandable and inconsistent to logic.

3. The quality of decisions through referendums is significantly affected by the phenomena of demagogy, the wording of the question and the number of options/responses the voters have. The most favorable case for correct collective decisions is when the question is of the type: A or B, Yes or No.

The result of this research is obviously contrary to common sense and to the logic of Statistics, Statistics Mechanics and Quantum Mechanics, where decisions / conclusions of a totality, have the maximum reliability compared with those of a subset of the totality- and much less of one person.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the reliability of the results of the research was not only disputed, but was reinforced from the experience of the people who found that these differences were actually real.

Identifying and understanding the causes and therefore the process of creation of this strange and irrational phenomenon has a big and crucial significance because it is related:

• With the universal validity of logical and fundamental physical principles.

• With the question of the ability of ordinary citizens to take collective decisions with the power of logic and

• With the adopting the view – and mostly the practice – that ordinary citizens take collective decisions with the power of instincts, emotions and motivations rather than logic; ie that they take decisions in the same way that irrational beings do.

It is perhaps interesting to recall that animals decide and apply decisions with the power of instincts and motives and that the only exception is man who has the prime possibility to take decisions with the power of reason.

The above data and views lead to the conclusion that the “paradox phenomenon” constitutes a deviation from the normal and healthy human behavior, it is like a “disease” which removes or diminishes the human logical force selectively in the field of political decisions by referendums. The finding that the logical power of the people is great when decisions are taken individually and reduced or canceled when taken collectively refers to the disease of divided personality that is to schizophrenia. This disease when concern the people as members of the society constitutes a “Social Schizophrenia”.

The causes and responsible people of social schizophrenia

The responsible people of this social disease are easily identified, if we apply the doctrine of prosecutors. According to this doctrine the responsible of every criminal act is he who benefit from it.

In this case, the degradation of the logical force of people, in decision-making selectively by referendum, clearly promotes the interests of rulers, because consolidates the view that there is an absolute need decisions to be taken by a few people, while the vast majority of the citizens simply have to execute these decisions. In other words it promotes and consolidates the same old recipe used by the Kings – Gods, the Divine Right Kings, the Enlightened Leaders and the Fathers of the People; that the people only have to perform their decisions.

The emergence and spread of the social schizophrenia is due to the abolition of the status of the “governing and governed” citizen, ie the status that is nothing more than verification that all people dispose a logic power.

Important point is that this deletion has been taken in practice while in theory the status of the governing and the governed citizen is recognized broadly and without reservation. The famous saying that “the people are the bosses” said from the politicians and intellectuals, actually means that the people are the bosses provided that they are not ruling.

A second factor that reinforces this conclusion is that those exercising the power, have not attempted to cure this “disease” but tried to present it as a characteristic of human nature and therefore any effort for its treatment is utopian, if not hybris (as the ancient Greeks said). According to them, the great decisions have to be taken by the One or by a few “enlightened”, but to be executed by all citizens. The rationalism and the morality of such a view are obvious.

The results of the disease

The abolition of the status of “the governing and governed” citizen, had as a medium term effect:

(a) Atrophy and degradation of the citizens’ logic, because it was not used in the field of exercising of the political power, and

(b) Reduction of the citizens’ responsibility on the state problems, because the responsibility has been transferred from the owners/citizens, to their representatives.

The first result greatly increased the power of lords that they got the institutional right, to be taking the major strategic decisions without citizen’s agreement, and then to argue that they have been substantially taken from the citizens.

The second result became a boomerang for the politicians, because decisions can be taken without the citizen’s consent, but is impossible to be realized without the active citizens’ participation [ii]

The great difficulty, if not impossibility, for the application of the plethora of political decisions taken today, proves that the boomerang is not a theory but a visible reality.

The therapy of the disease

Similar to the treatment of any disease, the treatment of the social schizophrenia can be achieved by canceling the cause which has created it. This can be achieved through the existence of a real and not of a verbal, “governing and governed” citizen’s status.

The power and responsibility of citizens is not, as many believe, two autonomous entities, but a single and indivisible entity. When one of them is canceled, automatically the other is also canceled. When there is a shortage of citizens’ power automatically a deficit of their responsibility is created. This does not apply to the representatives of the citizens who have the status only of lords.

In today’s political system, the power of the citizens has actually been canceled by those exercising the power and has been replaced by verbosity. But nature is not fooled by words. The creation of responsible citizens but without power is unattainable with deterministic certainty.

In today’s power system, the rulers/representatives of the people have the institutional right to take: (1) strategic major decisions affecting the citizens and (2) the minor decisions which come out and are limited from the strategic decisions. But in the real Democracy, the Democracy of ancient Greek culture, the major decisions were taken by the citizens and the minor ones by the rulers. So the citizens were the boss and lords were the servants of the citizens.

In this way, there was faith and cohesion of the society in the application of the major decisions / objectives.

The fact that today, the big decisions are taken by lords, who claim that they do so by executing the citizen’s mandate, but are not taken by the citizens, have as a consequence these decisions to be constantly into question and the struggles and sacrifices of citizens to become without coherence and efficiency.

Addressing of the “paradox phenomenon”

In modern Greece, politicians and other competent were not involved in the understanding and treatment of the paradox, but with its surpassing. This happened in the following three ways:

1. Informal cancelation of referendums in practice, not in the constitutional law. This transaction was very easy because referendums in Greece are decided by the government and not from the people or by assets provisions. As was expected the rulers / representatives hardly decided to put their authority under the power of the citizens and so in the last 70 years two referendums only have been done in Greece. This very low frequency of referendum – a referendum every thirty years – until recently, perhaps was justified from the great difficulties of informing citizens and the very high cost of making them. But now that the digital technology is widely used in many areas of public life (taxation, public safety, healthcare,..), these difficulties can be surpassed. By using the new technology of informatics, the “digital referendums” will have much lower direct and indirect cost, high operating and financial information for the public and greater security and reliability, compared to conventional ones.

2. Big decisions have to be taken from the “enlightened leaders” of the party and only minor decisions through referendums, in order not to affect the power of the party lords. This way, besides rendering difficult the exercising of power, completely subverts the original philosophy of the ancient Greek Democracy, where the few major decisions were taken by the citizens and the plethora of minor ones, introduced and limited by the majors, by the lords.

3. Doing referendum of confused way, in which the existence of paradox decisions is … impossible. The method was simple. Like the egg of Columbus. Instead of question type A or B, they initiated referendums of query type, A or A, so paradox and absurd result cannot be found

All Greeks are well aware about the initiators these ways to overcome the paradox of voting in the country that has been the Cradle of Democracy.

Conclusion

The nature of the referendum leads to decisions not of degraded quality and reliability, but instead leads to decisions that have thoughtful wisdom, great reliability and the widest possible acceptance. Opposite opinions and findings, is the work of the established power, which has the contractual right to decide the application of the referendum, the wording of the question, the way and the morality of citizens’ awareness, the rules and the frequency of referendums. With a referendum every 30 years, it is not possible to have, logic, experience and familiarity of the citizens with the institution of referendums, the institution which is the essence of authentic democracy.

[i] J. Haskell. Direct Democracy or Representative Government, Westview Press, 2001.

[ii] More on the side: http://www.dd-democracy.gr/article.asp?Id=42